Much of the information a Cape Cod Commission subcommittee said it needed to evaluate the Cape Wind project will be available, just not now, the company argued at a subcommittee meeting Tuesday.

Attorney Dennis Duffy, vice president of regulatory affairs for Cape Wind, said the subcommittee should recommend conditional approval of the project with the understanding that specifics on items such as an emergency response plan would have to be in place before construction could begin.

The commission is reviewing the land and sea portions of the project that falls within its jurisdiction, which extends to the three-mile limit of state waters.

Duffy pointed to the Commission's staff report on the project, which he said notes that similar details are "typically not finalized at this state."

The suggestion was a non-starter, and the subcommittee, which had voted Sept. 24 to recommend a procedural denial without prejudice, moved on to review a dozen or so mostly minor corrections to the recommendation that will be presented to the full Commission Oct. 18. That meeting will begin at 3 p.m. in the Assembly of Delegates chamber at 1 st District Court House in Barnstable Village.

According to the report, the subcommittee voted unanimously for the procedural denial because "the applicant would not sign an extension agreement to extend the 60-day DRI (Development of Regional Impact) decision time (a) to permit the Subcommittee to consider the late-filed information, and (b) to allow Cape Wind to gather and submit the additional information requested by the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act to assess the impacts of the proposed project. The Subcommittee was not able to reach a conclusion as to whether the portion of the project within Barnstable County was consistent with the MPSs (Minimum Performance Standards) of the RPP (Regional Policy Plan) based on the lack of detailed and specific information, and the delayed filing of some information by Cape Wind."

Although Cape Wind did agree to a two-week review extension, it balked at a 60-day extension sought by the subcommittee. In its recommendation, the group said that meant the Commission "could not deliberate on: whether the probable benefits of the proposed project outweigh the probable detriments; whether the proposed development is consistent with local development bylaws; whether the proposed project is consistent with the Barnstable Local Comprehensive Plan."

The benefits-detriment test was the one through which the Commission intended to expand its review scope to encompass the entire project, not just the part on land and in state waters.

Taking a look ahead, attorney Liza Cox, representing the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, asked the subcommittee to include language specifying the process of appealing a decision by the Commission. Noting that the state Energy Facilities Siting Board had overturned a Commission decision on a Keyspan utility line, Duffy said such matters had to be "argued by lawyers on another day," but said he would not object to a simple citation.

In remarks made from notes at the start of Tuesday's meeting, Duffy said the draft decision presented a distorted view of the information provided and charged that Cape Wind had been held to an arbitrarily different standard that is inconsistent with Commission precedent.

Duffy tried to separate the commissioners and their staff by noting that the subcommittee had rejected proposed conditional resolutions, suggesting an agenda of obstruction.

In a press statement, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound 's CEO Glenn Wattley charged that Cape Wind wants "to put the cart before the horse" in refusing to grant a review extension that would allow the Commission to examine the federal Draft Environmental Impact Statement due out before the end of the year.